After the Mexican-American war, as the United States slipped into an antebellum period following the acquisition of California through the treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, manifest destiny once again consumed the minds of numerous Americans. When, in 1849, gold was discovered near Sutter's Mill in California numerous "forty-niners" overcome with "gold fever" quickly rushed to California hoping to strike it rich. The California gold rush attracted tens of thousands of people which quickly overloaded the feeble territorial government with miscreants, thus creating a dire need for the swift establishment of an effective governmental system to replace the current system of vigilante justice. California soon applied for statehood as a free soil state and the issue of slavery once again surfaced in the forefront of political debate. The country was faced with a dilemma; should the state be admitted as a free soil state the south would be forced to forfeit their senatorial equilibrium, however allowing the state to have slaves would evoke the wrath of the radical abolitionists in New England. Sectionalism rapidly convulsed the nation as the south bonded together more tightly in defense of slavery, New England turned evermore to radical abolition, and the west remained attached to traditional democratic principles. The debates following the Mexican-American war greatly mirrored the perpetually increasing sectional divide between New Englanders, Westerners, and Southerners due primarily to popular sovereignty, extremists on both sides of the slavery issue, and controversial legislation and provisions. Sectionalism amid New Englanders, Westerners, and Southerners became more predominant after the conclusion of the Mexican-American war due, i... ... middle of paper ... ...ong the various sections of the United States increased. The country, similarly to the democratic party, shattered along sectional lines due to the individual interests of the sections. The south, above all, was bonded in an effort to preserve and spread slavery through the usage of popular sovereignty. New England was bonded together with the conviction that slavery was immoral and that the spread of slavery should be hindered. The west was bonded together over a mutual appreciation of democratic principles such as popular sovereignty as well as an understanding that slavery was undesirable within their own states because it would add additional competition. As the nation turned upon itself there was no other alternative but war which would ultimately pit one section of the nation against the other in a battle of slavery, moral conviction, and personal liberties.
In Apostles of Disunion, Dew presents compelling documentation that the issue of slavery was indeed the ultimate cause for the Civil War. This book provided a great deal of insight as to why the South feared the abolition of slavery as they did. In reading the letters and speeches of the secession commissioners, it was clear that each of them were making passionate pleas to all of the slave states in an effort to put a stop to the North’s, and specifically Lincoln’s, push for the abolishment of slavery. There should be no question that slavery had everything to do with being the cause for the Civil War. In the words of Dew, “To put it quite simply, slavery and race were absolutely critical elements in the coming of the war” (81). This was an excellent book, easy to read, and very enlightening.
In “Antebellum Southern Exceptionalism: A New Look at an Old Question” James McPherson argues that the North and the South are two very different parts of the country in which have different ideologies, interests, and values. Mcpherson writes this to show the differences between the north and the south. He gives perspectives from other historians to show how the differently the differences were viewed. These differences included the north being more industrialized while the south was more agricultural. He gives evidence to how the differences between the north and south came together as the south produced tobacoo, rice, sugar and cotton, which was then sent to the north to be made into clothing or other fabrics. Mcpherson analyzes the differences
In, “Apostles of Disunion: Southern Secession Commissioners and the Causes of the Civil War,” Charles B. Dew analyzes the public letters and speeches of white, southern commissioners in order to successfully prove that the Civil War was fought over slavery. By analyzing the public letters and speeches, Dew offers a compelling argument proving that slavery along with the ideology of white supremacy were primary causes of the Civil War. Dew is not only the Ephraim Williams Professor of American History at Williams College, but he is also a successful author who has received various awards including the Elloit Rudwick Prize and the Fletcher Pratt Award. In fact, two of Dew’s books, Tredegar Iron Works and Apostles of Disunion and Ironmaker to
One huge issue that led the country to sectionalism was slavery as some people wanted to support and allow slavery, whereas others didn’t. Sectionalism became more noticeable during the Missouri Compromise as the government didn’t allow slavery above the 36’30 line. As a result, the Northern and Southern region became more defined as the North wanted to abolish slavery, but the South wanted to keep it as the country expanded. When America added the Mexican te...
There are two mind paths to choose when considering the statement that the compromises of the 1800s were not really compromises, but sectional sellouts by the North, that continually gave in to the South's wishes. The first is that the compromises really were compromises, and the second is that the compromises were modes of the North selling out. Really, there is only one correct mind path of these two, and that is that the North sold out during these compromises and gave the South what it wanted for minimal returns. The three main compromises of the 19th century, the compromises of 1820 (Missouri) and 1850 and the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854 each were ways for the south to gain more power so that eventually, it could secede.
From the start of the American Civil War, 1860, until the end of the Reconstruction, 1877, the United States of America endured what can be considered a revolution. Prior to the year 1860, there was a lack of union because of central government power flourishing rather than state power. Therefore, there was a split of opposite sides, North and South, fighting for authority. One major issue that came into mind was of slavery. At first, there were enactments that were issued to limit or rather prevent conflict to erupt, such as the numerous compromises, Missouri Compromise and the Compromise of 1850. They did not fulfill the needs of the states, South states in particular; therefore, in the year 1860, the Civil War had commenced. There was the issue of inequality of Blacks in suffrage, politics, and the use of public facilities. However, much constitutional and social advancement in the period culminated in the revolution. To a radical extent, constitutional development between 1860 and 1877 amount to a revolution because of events like the Emancipation Proclamation, Civil Rights Act, the amendments that tried to change African Americans lives in American Society and contributed to get the union together. There is the social developments as well that to a lesser extent had amounted to the revolution because of organizations like the Klu Klux Klan, Freedmen’s Bureau lacking, and discrimination against African Americans that caused progression of violence and white supremacy.
In the years paving the way to the Civil War, both north and south were disagreeable with one another, creating the three “triggering” reasons for the war: the fanaticism on the slavery issue, the Kansas-Nebraska Act, and the separation of the Democratic Party. North being against the bondage of individuals and the South being for it, there was no real way to evade the clash. For the south slavery was a form of obtaining a living, without subjugation the economy might drop majorly if not disappear. In the North there were significant ethical issues with the issue of subjugation. Amazing measures to keep and dispose of subjugation were taken and there was never a genuine adjusted center for bargain. Despite the fact that there were a lot of seemingly insignificant issues, the fundamental thing that divided these two states was bondage and the flexibilities for it or against. With these significant extremes, for example, John Brown and Uncle Tom's Cabin, the south felt disdain towards the danger the Northerners were holding against their alleged flexibilities. The more hatred the South advanced, the more combative they were to anything the Northerners did. Northerners were irritated and it parted Democrats over the issue of bondage and made another Republican gathering, which included: Whigs, Free Soilers, Know Nothings and previous Democrats and brought about a split of segments and abbreviated the street to common war. Southerners loathed the insubordination of the north and started to address how they could stay with the Union.
There were many problems, events, and situations that led to the Civil War. One of the major reasons for the outbreak of the war was sectionalism. Once the United States was split, many of the country's fundamental issues were disputed, with slavery being at the top of the list. Some of the other major issues in dispute were representation, tariffs, and states' rights. Sectionalism is defined as, the sharp socio-economic differences that divided the Northern and the Southern states in the U.S.
The presidential elections of 1860 was one of the nation’s most memorable one. The north and the south sections of country had a completely different vision of how they envision their home land. What made this worst was that their view was completely opposite of each other. The north, mostly republican supporters, want America to be free; free of slaves and free from bondages. While on the other hand, the south supporters, mostly democratic states, wanted slavery in the country, because this is what they earned their daily living and profit from.
...1There were more slaves in the Southern states of America, as the conditions were better for the slaves to work on a plantation to make cotton. Conflicts started between the “Slave” and “Free” states and increased more as religious groups such as the Quakers began to argue that slavery was a moral evil. As a result of this conflict slavery was abolished in the Northern states between 1774 and 1804. In the South slavery was an essential as they needed large amounts of unskilled labour for their cotton plantations.
After thoroughly assessing past readings and additional research on the Civil War between the North and South, it was quite apparent that the war was inevitable. Opposed views on this would have probably argued that slavery was the only reason for the Civil War. Therefore suggesting it could have been avoided if a resolution was reached on the issue of slavery. Although there is accuracy in stating slavery led to the war, it wasn’t the only factor. Along with slavery, political issues with territorial expansion, there were also economic and social differences between North and South. These differences, being more than just one or two, gradually led to a war that was bound to happened one way or another.
The North and the South had been sectionalized for years on many issues, yet the majority of the congressmen had still come together when necessary for the good of the Nation, up until 1854. After Lincoln won the election in 1860, the nation was divided by sectionalism. Due to the Nation being divided and the Southerners being paranoid about the slaves being freed, I believe both issues were causes that led to the Civil War. Works Cited Brands, H. W.. American Stories: A History of the United States. New York: Routledge, 1998 2nd ed.
Imagine a historian, author of an award-winning dissertation and several books. He is an experienced lecturer and respected scholar; he is at the forefront of his field. His research methodology sets the bar for other academicians. He is so highly esteemed, in fact, that an article he has prepared is to be presented to and discussed by the United States’ oldest and largest society of professional historians. These are precisely the circumstances in which Ulrich B. Phillips wrote his 1928 essay, “The Central Theme of Southern History.” In this treatise he set forth a thesis which on its face is not revolutionary: that the cause behind which the South stood unified was not slavery, as such, but white supremacy. Over the course of fourteen elegantly written pages, Phillips advances his thesis with evidence from a variety of primary sources gleaned from his years of research. All of his reasoning and experience add weight to his distillation of Southern history into this one fairly simple idea, an idea so deceptively simple that it invites further study.
California started its statehood unlike any other state before or after it succession. California entered the nation as a free state in 1950, during the time of the Gold Rush. From the Gold Rush came the term “California Dream” which is the “psychological motivation to gain fast wealth or fame in a new land” (Manhattan-Institute.org). From the time of the Gold Rush up until recent years, California has been associated with obtaining fast wealth and fame. This encouraged people from all over the world to come to California in hopes of striking it rich, just as people continued to do up until the 90's. The discovery of gold in California in 1848 immensely accelerated certain changes that had been in the making for decades. For instance, California was already filled with different races and cultures, but when the Gold Rush struck, California became an international frontier where people from every continent were joining together. “California also set an important precedent for civil societies with diverse populations” (page 121). By 1850, California was flooded with over 300,000 people seeking gold. The fact that California has always attracted so many different people has created a land filled with many languages, cultures, and social customs. “The arrival and departure of thousan...
The American Civil War was the bloodiest military conflict in American history leaving over 500 thousand dead and over 300 thousand wounded (Roark 543-543). One might ask, what caused such internal tension within the most powerful nation in the world? During the nineteenth century, America was an infant nation, but toppling the entire world with its social, political, and economic innovations. In addition, immigrants were migrating from their native land to live the American dream (Roark 405-407). Meanwhile, hundreds of thousand African slaves were being traded in the domestic slave trade throughout the American south. Separated from their family, living in inhumane conditions, and working countless hours for days straight, the issue of slavery was the core of the Civil War (Roark 493-494). The North’s growing dissent for slavery and the South’s dependence on slavery is the reason why the Civil War was an inevitable conflict. Throughout this essay we will discuss the issue of slavery, states’ rights, American expansion into western territories, economic differences and its effect on the inevitable Civil War.